**Problem:**
When an appointment is cancelled, the cancellation email is always sent in the organizer's (staff member's) language, ignoring the booking customer's language. The booking confirmation, by contrast, is correctly localized.

**Steps to reproduce:**
1. Set a contact's language to a non-default one (e.g. Romanian).
2. Book an appointment for that contact (they are the booker/attendee).
3. Cancel the appointment.
4. The customer received the confirmation in Romanian but the cancellation email arrives in English.

**Current behavior:**
The cancellation email is rendered in the organizer's language.

**Expected behavior:**
The cancellation email is rendered in the booking customer's language, like the confirmation/invitation email.

**Cause of the issue:**
The cancellation uses `appointment_canceled_mail_template`, whose `lang` is `{{ object.partner_id.lang }}`. On `calendar.event`, `partner_id` is `related='user_id.partner_id'`, i.e. the organizer, not the customer. The template is posted once per event (via `_track_template`), so its single rendering language applies to every recipient, including attendees whose own language differs. The confirmation email is unaffected because it is the per-attendee `attendee_invitation_mail_template` (model `calendar.attendee`), rendered once per attendee in that attendee's language.

**Fix:**
Deriving the language from `appointment_booker_id` makes the cancellation consistent with the other appointment mails, which are meant for the person who booked the meeting. It falls back to `partner_id` when there is no booker (e.g. an event not created through the appointment flow), preserving the previous behavior in that case.

opw-6323179

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125927
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124116

Steps to reproduce:-
- Open any report.
- Click on a particular line to unfold more than once very fast(or throttle network to 3G)
- Once line is unfolded click again to fold that line.
- Line is not folding.

Cause:-
- When we clicked multiple times to unfold line, duplicate child lines were created(as many times as many times we clicked).
- Because when first promise was not resolved so `unfolded = false` and we clicked again so new promise also tries to unfold  the same line, resulting in unfolding the same line multiple times.
- In version 17.0 these duplicate child lines are created but somehow not visible but it breaks `foldLine`. From version 18.0 onwards these duplicate child lines are visible.

Solution: In `unfoldLine` set the flag `unfolding`. So in all clicks other than first, we get `unfolding = true` and don't proceed further, preventing unfolding the same line multiple times.

task-6260425

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#126765
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120392

Steps to reproduce:

1) Install hr_holidays & hr_attendance.
2) Enable "Display Extra Hours" & "Absence Management" in the Attendance app settings.
3) Make a new employee, in the form view click the "+" button to make a new hr version record for this employee.
4) Set the date to be the first of the last month.
5) In the Attendance app -> New -> Select the new employee.
6) Select the check in and out dates to be from last month, edit the times such that the time worked is between 7 and 8 hours (ex 9:00am to 4:55pm).
7) In the Attendance app -> Reporting -> Attendances -> the test employee should have a negative value for "Worked Extra Hours"
8) Create a new time off type, enable "Deduct Extra Hours" & disable "Requires Allocation" use hours as the Unit of measure.
9) Open the time off smart button menu from the test employee's form view.

Issue) The value seen in the report from step 7 is not the same as what the user sees in the dashboard.

Notes) This issue can occur when an employee scheduled to work for 8 hours a day only clocks in for 7:55 hours leading to a negative extra time.

The back-end has the correct value stored and sends it to the browser. The issue occurs because the JavaScript function that converts the decimal number of hours into a string (9.5 -> "9:30") does not work with negative input. This PR resolves that issue. 

opw-6417543 

---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#280491

### Issue:
A user who can modify `tax_exigibility` but does not have `account.group_account_readonly` is blocked from switching to `on_payment`
There is no way to complete the operation as the account field is not visible and cannot be filled before saving
 
### Cause:
When `tax_exigibility` is set to `on_payment`, the view expects `cash_basis_transition_account_id` to be filled before saving`_constrains_cash_basis_transition_account` then validates that the account is reconcilable
 
`cash_basis_transition_account_id` was restricted to `account.group_account_readonly`, hiding it from other users
The field is never rendered, so it cannot be filled
The `required` constraint is never evaluated client-side and `_constrains_cash_basis_transition_account` raises a `ValidationError` on save because the account is empty
 
There is no reason to restrict `cash_basis_transition_account_id` independently — if a user can modify `tax_exigibility`, they must also be able to set the linked account
 
### Steps to reproduce:
- Install `account`
- Enable Cash Basis in Settings
  (On RunBot ensure no default account is set)
- Enable Developer Mode in Settings
- Go to Settings > Users & Companies > Users
- Open the current user and disable both:
  `Show Accounting Features - Readonly` and `Show Full Accounting Features` (if set)
- Go to Invoicing > Configuration > Taxes
- Open any tax and go to Advanced Options
- Change Tax Exigibility to Based on Payment

Before the fix, the account selector is not displayed and saving raises an error
 
opw-6359173

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#274728

Before this commit, the `empty a many2one field in list view` test sometimes failed, because the many2one value wasn't correctly unset (`first record` was selected). This happened because we cleared the input and automatically validated (typically with tab). However, it could happen that the validation occurred after the dropdown was opened, so the first value of the dropdown was selected. As a matter of fact, adding `await runAllTimers()` after clearing the input is a way to make the test fail deterministically.

This commit avoids the issue by emptying the many2one without validation, so it basically only set the input value to the empty string, but doesn't tab/enter or anything else, hence it never selects an unwanted value.

runbot error-941430

Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:

Current behavior before PR:

Desired behavior after PR is merged:




---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#280351

**Steps to reproduce:**
- Go to any view where you can send mails (eg sale orders)
- Send a first mail to multiple recipients so they are added automatically on the next mail.
- Open a new mail, confirm that the recipients are present, add a selectable attachment (eg a PDF), then click on it.
- Remove any amount of recipients then send the mail.
- You will see that the recipients are added back and the mail is sent to them.

**Behavior:**
Currently whenever a user clicks on an attachment in a mail composer, the systems considers that the user might be trying
to leave the page and will trigger an `urgentSave()`, and further down the line a `web_save()`.

The behavior when a web_save() is triggered is to create a record if there isnt currently one, and otherwise to write the modified values onto the record, using commands.

The recipients for the mail are added by default, which is represented by a list of `[4, id]`add commands, that will be written on the record created in the first `web_save`, however this list is not correctly emptied after the first `_save()`.

If the list is present within `this._changes` then it is correctly cleared, but in the case where no changes were made, the within `this._values['partner_ids']` still contains the commands.
So when we later assign `this.data = { ...this._values };`, `this.data['partner_ids']` now contains our uncleared list of commands.

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/f3e407c6a58abd2ddba42f26fcbd1928da63cb63/addons/web/static/src/model/relational_model/record.js#L1222-L1230

And when we compute changes['partner_ids'] in our next iteration, we find ourselves with our command list again.
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/f3e407c6a58abd2ddba42f26fcbd1928da63cb63/addons/web/static/src/model/relational_model/record.js#L1317-L1322

So when we then try to remove a recipient tag, the new delete command `[3, id]`
just gets canceled out with the already present add command.
And the `write()` in `web_save()` only writes add commands of already present partners, which doesn't do anything.

----

This commit adds a line to ensure commands inside `_values` are cleared

opw-6304713

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#280533
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278876

This is rather an attempt of fix, as we couldn't reproduce the error locally or in a multi build., so we have no guarantee that this strenghtens the test.

The test sometimes fails as `.o_crop_icon` can't be found within 200ms. Before that, we wait for the video element to be ready (we rely on a patch of the `isVideoReady` method of the component to know that the video is ready). Once it is, the isReady flag in the state is set to true and the CropOverlay component renders its `o_crop_icon` element.

Our guess is that we may sometimes early return in `isVideoReady`, because the component has been destroyed (a new rendering might be on the way). To ensure that we don't take that as the ready signal in the test, we now only consider that we're ready if isVideoReady returned true (i.e. no early return).

runbot error-241798

Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:

Current behavior before PR:

Desired behavior after PR is merged:




---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#280329

**Issue**
Confirming a SO that generates a batch of MOs from a BoM with a
batch size could lead to creating an invalid number of pickings: all the
MOs end up sharing a single picking instead of getting one each.

**Steps to reproduce**
- Use 2-step manufacturing
- Create a storable product with the MTO + Manufacture routes
- Add a BOM that has a batch size of 10 that consumes one component
- Create and confirm a SO of 100 units of that product
-> 10 MOs are created, but each one points to the same "Pick Components" transfer instead of getting its own.

**Cause**
This commit dd6ee071f949752d31497d9f975ba7fc41ebcd98 batches the confirm of productions: 
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/b51dc298fd63d9586d0b8d7cff59764b0dee5cae/addons/mrp/models/stock_rule.py#L120
thus `assign_picking` is called in batches: 
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/b51dc298fd63d9586d0b8d7cff59764b0dee5cae/addons/mrp/models/mrp_production.py#L1653
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/b51dc298fd63d9586d0b8d7cff59764b0dee5cae/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L1736-L1737
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/b51dc298fd63d9586d0b8d7cff59764b0dee5cae/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L1550-L1556
since, the `reference_ids` are the same for each MO/stock.move (they all come from the same procurement):
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/b51dc298fd63d9586d0b8d7cff59764b0dee5cae/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L1712-L1713

Consequently, all the moves end up in the same recordset `moves`:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/b51dc298fd63d9586d0b8d7cff59764b0dee5cae/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L1527
Creating only one picking:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/b51dc298fd63d9586d0b8d7cff59764b0dee5cae/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L1577

opw-6403427

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#279179

Issue
-----
Branch companies can have quants of a product limited to their parent company, but they don't show in the per location report.

Steps to reproduce
-----
- Create a branch company
	- Create a WH for the branch
- Create a tracked product
	- Company set to parent only
- Switch to the branch company
	- Add a quant of the product in branch stock
- Open Inventory > Reporting > Locations

> The product is not shown although there is a quant in the branch

Cause
-----
The menu button triggers `action_view_quants`

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/03a3662212f094158f885ae6545009fd0a74d3cb/addons/stock/views/stock_quant_views.xml#L493-L495

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/03a3662212f094158f885ae6545009fd0a74d3cb/addons/stock/models/stock_quant.py#L399-L402

The problem here comes from the fact that in `_get_quants_action`, we limit the products to those of only the active companies, instead of allowing to view those of parent companies aswell.

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/03a3662212f094158f885ae6545009fd0a74d3cb/addons/stock/models/stock_quant.py#L1330

Such a change works because the domain is specifically for the product's (`product_id.company_id`) and not the location's.

-----
Ticket:
opw-6131525

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#280083
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#277531

Version:
--------
- 19.0+

Steps to reproduce:
-------------------
- Install `purchase` and `stock`
- Create a Purchase Order for a storable or consumable product
- Set the ordered quantity to a negative value (e.g. `-10`)
- Confirm the Purchase Order.
- Open the Deliveries and search using the Purchase Order name

Issue:
------
An outgoing return picking is correctly created for 10 units, but an
additional empty incoming receipt is also generated and linked to the
Purchase Order.

Cause:
------
When a Purchase Order is confirmed, `purchase.order.button_approve()` calls
`purchase.order._create_picking()`:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/ed0d1bd21131920cb9c7b2ae69d7baedc2818e85/addons/purchase_stock/models/purchase_order.py#L179

Inside `_create_picking()`, if no open picking exists yet,
Then first creates an incoming receipt using `_prepare_picking()`:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/ed0d1bd21131920cb9c7b2ae69d7baedc2818e85/addons/purchase_stock/models/purchase_order.py#L382

The generated receipt is configured with:
- source location: Vendor
- destination location: Stock
- picking type: Incoming
- origin: Purchase Order reference

Stock moves are then created on that receipt through:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/ed0d1bd21131920cb9c7b2ae69d7baedc2818e85/addons/purchase_stock/models/purchase_order.py#L387-L388

For negative PO quantities, the move is initially created with a negative
demand:

```
Vendor -> Stock, quantity -10
````

During `stock.move._action_confirm()`, stock identifies such moves in
`neg_r_moves`:
[https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/ed0d1bd21131920cb9c7b2ae69d7baedc2818e85/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L1604](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/ed0d1bd21131920cb9c7b2ae69d7baedc2818e85/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L1604)

Those moves are automatically converted into return moves by:

* swapping source and destination locations,
* converting the quantity to positive,
* assigning the return picking type when available:
  [https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/ed0d1bd21131920cb9c7b2ae69d7baedc2818e85/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L1612-L1614](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/ed0d1bd21131920cb9c7b2ae69d7baedc2818e85/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L1612-L1614)

The resulting move becomes:

```
Stock -> Vendor, quantity 10
```

The converted move is then reassigned through:
[https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/ed0d1bd21131920cb9c7b2ae69d7baedc2818e85/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L1630](https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/ed0d1bd21131920cb9c7b2ae69d7baedc2818e85/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L1630)

This correctly creates the outgoing return picking.

However, the original incoming receipt created earlier by
`purchase_stock` is left without any moves, resulting in an empty
ghost receipt linked to the Purchase Order.

Solution:
---------
- Track whether `_create_picking()` created a new incoming receipt during
the current confirmation flow.

- After stock move confirmation, if that newly-created receipt no longer
contains any moves, unlink it and remove it from the pickings to
confirm.

- This preserves the valid outgoing return picking while preventing empty
incoming receipts from being generated.


NOTE:
------

This Issue not reproduce from saas-19.3. 
Fix in this [commit](https://github.com/odoo-dev/odoo/commit/81caaaa3f7212ad5d9d72cd446b65c5fb0a9bef9)

---

opw-6131329

---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#265704

### Steps to reproduce:

- Create 3 AVCO products: Super Kit, Kit, Comp
- Super Kit BoM: 2 x Kit
- Kit BoM: 1 x Comp
- Create and confirm a purchase order for 1 X Super Kit at 100
- Validate the receipt of 2 Comp
- Go to the valuation
> Both units of Comp are valued at 100 for a total of 200

### Cause of the issue:

The issue has been introduced by:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/158849/changes/713701a5035d342263e3fef2a2819b5696b6d063 To be more precise, the price unit of each unit of Comp is expected to be computed by the `_get_price_unit`. This method used to rely on the `product_qty` appropriately:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/158849/changes/713701a5035d342263e3fef2a2819b5696b6d063#diff-687527af1723e60816358020c4d83687479df62ca0cfd71079f0a82afb4b3efeL27 However, backorder adapt the move demand and hence did not provide the appropriate demand in this flow that computation logic was changed to rely on the `bom` and `bom_line` quantities:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/29977a6a80442af49ecefa7fef54f085483d8f77/addons/purchase_mrp/models/stock_move.py#L20-L40 This new computation is not correct in case of nested boms since the `bom_line` only carries the unit demand on the last explosion stage.

### Additional issue:

If nested kit boms lead to the creation of 2 moves with the same `cost_share` and `bom_line_id`, these moves will be merged without summing their `cost_share` leading to an under pricing of the kit since its related `stock_move`'s `cost_share` will not sum up to 100 percents anymore.

This issue is tested in `test_avco_purchase_nested_kit_explode_cost_share_backorder_2` and fixed similarly to demand merging:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/613f3cb7b2f4813ce6c8f53718a6cca841b081ad/addons/stock/models/stock_move.py#L1122-L1134

### Note:

We also modify the test `test_valuation_with_backorder` to be understandable and to make appropriate asserts.

opw-6253776

---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#279890
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276242

Steps to reproduce the bug:
- Create three storable products C1 ($10), C2 ($20), C3 ($5)
- Create a product P1 with a BoM: 1x C1 + 1x C2
- Create a Manufacturing Order for P1 and validate it
- Unlock the MO (Settings > Unlock)
- Add C3 as an extra component on the unlocked MO
- Open the MO overview

Problem:
The extra move had value=0 after creation, causing the unit_cost in the
MO overview to appear as 0. When a move is added to a done picking or MO
it is created with state='done' and quantity set immediately. This triggers
_set_quantity_done, which creates the move line and calls
_set_value(correction_quantity=delta). Inside _set_value, for outgoing
moves with a correction_quantity, the code computes:
  previous_qty = move.quantity - correction_quantity
Since the move had no prior quantity, previous_qty=0. The original code then
computed ratio=0 and applied move.value += 0, leaving value=0 instead of
computing it from scratch.

Solution:
When previous_qty=0, skip the ratio branch and fall through to the existing
from-scratch computation (standard_price * _get_valued_qty() for AVCO/standard
costing, _run_fifo() for FIFO).

opw-6377393

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276303

Steps to reproduce the error: (Python Version: 3.14.X)
- Install ``accounting_firm`` industry with demo data

Code for server action to generate the error:
```py
for i in [1]:
    try:
        pass
    except Exception:
        pass
    if i:
        pass
```

Traceback:
```py
ValueError: forbidden opcode(s) in'...': JUMP_BACKWARD_NO_INTERRUPT
```

https://github.com/odoo/industry/blob/701f7595453772e42ce72aa75df346a504e5bd82/accounting_firm/demo/ir_actions_server.xml#L105-L108
The server action contains a ``for`` loop with a ``try/except`` block followed by additional statements in the loop body,
this combination generates the ``JUMP_BACKWARD_NO_INTERRUPT`` opcode, which is not included in ``_SAFE_OPCODES`` at [1].
When the server action is evaluated by ``safe_eval``, it calls the ``assert_valid_codeobj`` method, which validates the compiled bytecode against ``_SAFE_OPCODES``. Since ``JUMP_BACKWARD_NO_INTERRUPT`` is not present in the allowed opcodes, ``assert_valid_codeobj()`` raises a ``ValueError`` at [2] before the server action is executed .

Solution:
``JUMP_BACKWARD_NO_INTERRUPT`` opcode is added in the ``_SAFE_OPCODES`` and it is also added in the ``_SAFE_QWEB_OPCODES``.
It was added in Python 3.11: https://docs.python.org/3/whatsnew/3.11.html#new-opcodes

``JUMP_BACKWARD_NO_INTERRUPT`` is a control-flow opcode that only changes
the interpreter's execution flow by jumping back to a previous instruction.
It is the equivalent to ``JUMP_BACKWARD`` opcode. Its only semantic difference is
that the interpreter does not perform an interrupt check at that instruction.
It does not introduce any new capabilities or perform operations such as
attribute access, imports, function calls, or object creation.
Ref: https://docs.python.org/3.12/library/dis.html#opcode-JUMP_BACKWARD_NO_INTERRUPT

Similar commit that adds some necessary opcodes: 
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/86498d24946e510025add5d24ef0d4bcce8ad05f

[1]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/2ccbc4660077bd48529e9de43d4309fbfafc75ca/odoo/tools/safe_eval.py#L135
[2]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/2ccbc4660077bd48529e9de43d4309fbfafc75ca/odoo/tools/safe_eval.py#L244-L246

sentry-7614026125

---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#277192

### Issue:
A partner with VAT set to '/' incorrectly matches a fiscal position with `VAT required`, instead of one without

The '/' value is the placeholder suggested by the UI to indicate that the partner is known to have no VAT, but it was treated as a valid VAT by the fiscal position matching logic

### Cause:
`_get_fpos_ranking_functions` uses `_get_vat_valid` to rank fiscal positions based on VAT presence
`_get_vat_valid` returned `True` for any non-empty VAT value, including '/'
The '/' case was not excluded, causing it to be treated as a valid VAT number

### Steps to reproduce:
- Install `account`
- Create two fiscal positions with auto-apply:
-- Name: FP VAT, VAT required: True, sequence: 1
-- Name: FP no VAT, VAT required: False, sequence: 2
- Create a partner with VAT: '/'
- Create an Invoice for that partner and check the Fiscal Position

Before the fix, `FP VAT` is selected instead of `FP no VAT`

opw-6204531

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#280494
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#280065

## Issue
When logging timesheet from the *Recorded* smart button on a Sale Order containing multiple service items, the recorded hours will be added to the first sale order line, regardless of the task ID set on the timesheet entries.

## Steps to reproduce
1. Install *Sales Timesheet* (`sale_timesheet`)
2. Create a Product P:
    - *Product Type*: Service
    - *Create on Order*: Task
    - *Project*: Any
3. Create a SO:
    - *Customer*: Any
    - Add the product P on two different lines and give them two different descriptions D1 and D2
    - Confirm the SO, this will create two tasks with the names D1 and D2
4. On the SO, click the *Recorded* smart button and create two entries:
    1. Task D1, 2 hours spent
    2. Tsk D2, 3 hours spent
5. **Back on the SO, there are 5 hours registered for the first SOL (with the description D1), which does not match the entries we created from the smart button.**

It is worth noting that when we create the Timesheets entries from the project itself (instead of the SO's smart button), the hours are correctly distributed among the different SOLs.

## Cause
The SOL linked to the timesheet entry (`account.analytic.line`) is computed by `_compute_so_line`:

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/8b102f500f5a122e99b07a08cc43814e7c6f0f75/addons/sale_timesheet/models/hr_timesheet.py#L79-L82

This method sets the correct SOL under the condition that `is_so_line_edited` is False and `_is_no_billed()` returns True.

When opening the *Recorded* smart button from a SO, the `is_so_line_edited` is set to True by default, even if no SOL was modified.

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/8b102f500f5a122e99b07a08cc43814e7c6f0f75/addons/sale_timesheet/models/sale_order.py#L113-L117

As that value is never set to False, when trying to compute the SOL for the timesheet entry, the entry is skipped and the default SOL (which is the first one) is used instead.

opw-6133473

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#274759